Some fifteen minutes into Jab Harry Met Sejal, when I began to fidget in my seat, I wondered if my expectations were the problem. There’s first that title, suggesting two beloved romances, Jab We Met and When Harry Met Sally. But more importantly, the film unites Hindi cinema’s preeminent maker of love stories with the biggest romantic superstar since Rajesh Khanna. Recent reports suggested that the one-liner was about a man trying to commit suicide, and that the script was rewritten (at the star’s behest) to make it more of an “entertainer.” Maybe the film was taking its time to find its footing in a zone between Imtiaz Ali-ness and Shah Rukh Khan-ness.

But that never happens. The story begins with Harry (Shah Rukh), a European tour guide whose ennui is understandable. He keeps showing people new sights, but for him, it’s the same old thing, over and over – he’s like the windmill we see at the beginning, moving without getting anywhere. He drops his chummy tone the instant he sees his clients off. In short, he’s the classic Imtiaz Ali moper, waiting to be shaken up by the heroine. Enter Sejal (Anushka Sharma, whose Gujarati accent makes Harry sound like Hairy). She’s lost her engagement ring, and she wants Hairy to help her find it. In short, she’s the classic Imtiaz Ali heroine, put on this planet solely to mend this broken tour guide (at one point, she literally tends to his wounds), help this rootless man go “home” again.

It’s a daft premise, but, frankly, I’ve bought dafter ones. One of my favourite romances, Serendipity, has a plot a two-year-old would roll its eyes at (it’s also about a needle-in-the-haystack search, for a phone number inscribed in a book) – but when a film makes you feel, you stop processing it with your head and let yourself be guided by the heart. Imtiaz Ali himself does this so well. Those of us who are fans seek out his films not for logical plot construction, but for emotional moments that leave us gutted. Underneath the pretty faces, the prettier locales, there’s a time bomb ticking away. The suspense is like that in a thriller: When will it explode?

In Jab Harry Met Sejal, Ali forgets to light the fuse. On the surface, he checks all the elements that have come to define his films. The grey area between cheating and succumbing to an impulse. The road-movie romance, a journey that’s as much physical as psychological. The meant-to-be lovers who don’t realise they’re meant to be. (At one point, Sejal declares, “Main woh wali aurat nahin jo apni fiancé ko chhod kar kisi tour guide ke saath bhag jaye,” that she isn’t the kind of woman who’d ditch her fiancé and run off with a tour guide. Hah. Doesn’t she know she’s in an Imtiaz Ali movie?)

But then, what kind of woman is she? The most interesting – and underexplored – aspect of Sejal is that she may be something of a repressed sexual being. Of course, this being an Imtiaz Ali movie, we have no idea what her fiancé is like. (At least, he gets a few lines of dialogue, which is a better fate than that of the fiancé in Tamasha, who was introduced and dumped in ten seconds of Heer toh badi sad hai.) Sejal is stung when Harry says he cannot regard her that way, and their relationship, over time, begins to include hugs, massages, cuddling in bed. When she begins to sing in the Radha number, Harry asks if she can make her voice sexier – and she does. For a change, in an Imtiaz Ali movie, we seem to have a woman in need of an awakening. I wished we’d got that movie.

Instead, Sejal is just an annoyingly flighty creature. She takes a selfie with a stranger. She uses her law degree to tackle an embarrassing situation. She puts herself at risk by wandering around at night. You could argue that Geet, from Jab We Met, was a bit of all this as well, but we got the sense, there, that this was a little girl trying to act all grown-up, until her naiveté was exposed and she was forced to grow up. Sejal is like a grown-up who acts like a little girl, and it’s to Anushka Sharma’s credit that we stick with her even to the extent that we do.

Harry is a more mature version of the Shahid Kapoor character from Jab We Met, but the reason for his lifelessness (a yearning for home) isn’t as convincingly established as the latter’s (a mother’s remarriage). We get snatches of a dream (stripped of bright colour), and no sense of the people he left behind, who they are, what they meant to him. His friend sees his transformation (after Sejal breezes in) and is amazed, but we don’t see it. Shah Rukh is fine in a generic sense (though it’s hard to buy him as a serial seducer of European beauties; he seems too sanskari) – but he’s defeated by the generic character. Maybe Harry should have remained suicidal.

The film is generic as well. Maybe after three “heavy” dramas – Rockstar, Highway, Tamasha – Imtiaz Ali just wanted to kick back and take a foreign vacation. But even such an outing can be written well, and the biggest surprise of Jab Harry Met Sejal is the utter lack of Imtiaz Ali “moments.” The songs seem misplaced. (The second half begins with Beech beech mein!) The set pieces – a slapstick chase that turns dangerous, a run-in with a bizarre criminal named “Gas” – are terribly indulgent; they go on and on, like the scene where people speak English and the subtitles are the Hindi translations written in the Roman alphabet. As a result, the swoony moments are shortchanged, and Jab Harry Met Sejal ends up a cautionary tale about idiosyncratic filmmakers with a distinct voice working with a big star. Imtiaz Ali gets his biggest star yet, and he’s made his most underwhelming movie.

I was not aware of the suicidal protagonist plot line, thank you. If that story was developed well, leading us to that one fleeting moment towards the end of the movie where srk explains how a relationship is not started by giving a ring but by finding a person with an emptiness that one can fill, it would have been a pretty good Imtiaz movie. As you have rightly put, it serves as a cautionary tale for working with superstars. Maybe Shahrukh should work with a strong headed director who won’t budge.

Raghavendra: I read this recently, but someone on twitter said that storyline was for another film, so I don’t know. But I think the point still stands that massy stars and idiosyncratic filmmakers don’t really mix.

That movie is a classic romantic film that makes one simply genuinely fall for the premise of true destined love. A phone number in a book in Xmassy New York, it had a very cozy feel.

“more importantly, the film unites Hindi cinema’s preeminent maker of love stories with the biggest romantic superstar since Rajesh Khanna.”

But the thing is, both belong to different times and have very different sensibilities of what romance is, a romantic film is.

At this point, SRK is simply struggling to regain his romantic hero , superhero star image that he had in the nineties and the noughts.

He is lost and is just pursuing filmmakers who are making a mark in the present time, a time he simply hasn’t evolved into yet with the same stardom reckoning that he had decade earlier. Hence the problem. He doesn’t understand Ali, Ali moves in to cater the star’s (?) need making changes in the script and the end result is one that neither belongs to SRK nor Ali.

SRK is in a crisis, career wise and every such move, spells disaster for him without him gaining insight. A small G Shinde film isn’t enough although may be that is where he can step into. But does he want to? Where does SRK go from here? This question has been foremost since some years now with no unforeseeable answers yet.

Thanks for the review. This being one of your ‘shortest’ review of an Imtiaz Ali movie speaks louder about the quality of the movie! Even for an over-the-head Tamasha, your analysis was speaking volumes…

Ali fans don’t come to watch an srk vanity act..The madness and messiness of imtiaz’s relationships missing…imtiaz’s template should work how many ever times he repeats it. Two flawed people in a flawed relationship all so beautifully flawed and scarred. .but this looks like someone else steered it instead of imtiaz’s himself beyond a point or maybe even from the word go…flashes of imtiaz and aarti bajaj alone couldn’t keep it going. …and none of his movies have had these many repetitive self indulgent and on the nose scenes..wonder what it would have been if it were for a different star who would look and live like an imtiaz man….after all the rumi we get in his movies I wonder if this was what he was seeking …

“For a change, in an Imtiaz Ali movie, we seem to have a woman in need of an awakening. I wished we’d got that movie”.

Couldn’t agree with you more BR, and I had actually wished for the same in Tamasha like you as well… I wanted to know more about Tara… I wish she was better etched… For someone who dreamed of working with Imtiaz Ali for the longest time, I feel for Anushka… She really deserved better…

Regarding SRK, there was a time when I found him entertaining and endearing… Someone with whom I could genuinely connect with on screen… Whether it was some of his works in the 90s, movies like Pardes, Dil Se, Swades, or when he did a Main Hoon Na or OSO; he was fun to watch, which is what I personally miss nowadays… Everything about him and what de does just seems so dated and labored now; even a bit off-putting at times actually…

I usually have more mixed feelings after an Imtiaz Ali movie sir but this time I have to say I swerved more towards loving it than hating it..the movie worked for me! I don’t really know why.. seeing the movie more with my heart rather than the head I guess. SRK s back story could’ve been dealt with a little atleast though but I can look past that..the scene where they almost do it, but don’t was so good it made me get goose bumps. The movie to me was like Sejal figuring out who she is and finding harry in the process..like she says he is not as bad as he thinks he is and neither is she as stereotypical and sanskari as she is supposed to be. Somewhere in the middle lies the happily ever after..

I have not watched this movie and have absolutely no plans to – SRK falling in love with an already engaged girl while on a whirlwind Europe tour? No thanks, I watched that movie 22 years ago and then tortured myself watching a bazillion remakes, all starring SRK. I feel so so so bad for him. How could the guy who starred in fauji, baazigAr, swadesh, dil se, hey ram and chak de India reduce himself to this caricature?

Wild thought – if he completely gives every one his lover boy Raj/Rahul mannerisms and totally goes back to his roots, can you imagine him acting as Vedha in a Hindi remake?? I was trying to think of a Hindi actor who could play this role and I could only think of srk.

All the reviews and BR and all of you guys are now making me psycho analyse myself!! Why did I like this movie when so many didn’t 🙂 strangely all that everyone says doesn’t work is trueand I’m no SRK fan girl but I still liked the movie! The intimate parts of the movie are really good..or maybe I’m slightly “romance starved” that I’m finding the same old jaded stuff good.

And one more thing Mr BR the thing that you said she took a selfie with a stranger…I don’t think it was a selfie with a stranger..it was when Harry says she was better than that stripper that she takes those pics..to compare and feel good! And she even does a bit of a pole dance later which makes her feel sexy…she doesn’t take pics with anyone else? That’s how that bit felt to me.

Guess SRK, like Rajni down south, has still not arrived at the solution and in the process has been superseded by his peers and proteges.I really hope the star system fades and we get a Hollywood-like intellectual property system. We need our own blockbuster franchises which attract people with content/characters or even bombast, and not stars. Like Baahubali or even Enthiran. I’m not a big fan of Shankar but the guy at least takes efforts to deliver some spectacle. Say what you want about character and script and good filmmaking but in the end it is spectacle that attracts audiences.

I don’t think this was discussed in the nepotism thread, but nepotism is also probably a reason we don’t have effects driven films in India. It is not the primary cause but part of a vicious cycle where only star-driven films are bankrolled, driving up star salaries and giving rise to the perception that only star-driven films can succeed. It is in the best interests of the film fraternity to avoid making effects driven films.

Look at the success of Baahubali. It was a truly pan-Indian film and a humongous success. One would think the industry would produce more such films to cash in? I mean Baahubali might have been a one-off but people should at least try and release films to test that hypothesis?

i dont know why love happens in europe and foreign only? and to discover yourself you need to find a soulmate who is atleast 10 to 20 ears younger than you? first i enjoyed these type of movies earlier and after watching sairat all i can do is cringe after wasting my 400 bucks. During the second half i hated sejal. she annoyed the hell out of me and practically in the real world i’ve not even came across a person like her in the entire life.
SRK’s character was good, he was not a sanskaari virginated raj/rahul version as he used to be in romcoms but anushka’s character was damn shallow and desperate.

today, we need movies which questions our conscience? which makes us aware of issues that are still prevalent, that needs to be addressed not totally but even in the slightest form in any genre could be more than enough. however, it will continue till infiniity as we audience are considered fools, brainless and illiterate. terrible year but rays of hope can be seen in Shubh mangal savdhaan and toilet. praying that it is not venomous.

p.s. its just an opinion and everyone has different opinions. JHMS lovers, dont mind!

Raees: Kabali Jr (mismatch between the impulses of maker and the star, with the star giving more to the film than what it returns to him)

All of them had their own issues: Fan’s thriller portions being preposterous, Dear Zindagi being drainingly down despite very lighthanded treatment, Raees a victim of shoddy filmmaking.

But for JHMS, when I attempt to state an opinion, the answer ends up as: Hypothetical question

Smart or not, it is a heartfelt one. Wishing to see Shah Rukh Khan play something really better in a film where that role actually belongs to. Say something like a Vidheyan or Logan (or its equivalent). I say that as a Telugu filmbuff (translation: I have limited knowledge about other language films and am trying to improve).

I am quite surprised at the almost vicious backlash among critics, even sensible ones, for Jab Harry Met Sejal. I found it quite an enjoyable film, though admittedly not a mind blowing one. The lead stars have done very well, the songs are catchy and the movie does make bring a smile on your face.

I think SRK should continue doing the experimentation. I mean whats the point otherwise.

But he got to give 2 super hit movies now as his last good hit was CE and last universal hit was CDI and OSO. Because without hits he cant do experiment.

Its high time he should work with KJO, Bhansali, Hirani, may be Rajamouli, may be Ashutosh, may be Kabir. These directors understand their audience as well as they know how to use a star in proper way. They are good directors and can give superstar a role in which he fits in.

Also I think a biopic might be a great option for him as that also gives a chance to have a good role as well as larger than life persona, remember CDI.

Farah and Rohit have been inconsistent but their movies can make or further break SRK. Too risky.

But he should continue doing different roles because I really like this bit of daring of him. He gotta keep try. I don’t think he will have any difficulty finding movies as he is still the third star and mostly his movies are making okayish money. He himself has lot of money and can ask any writer to write movies for him.

With Imtiyaz I think he will suit in a role where he is older guy and falls in love with a younger girl or something bit different type of relationship [may be gay too]. I think he should make something like “Lost in Translation” with Imtiyaz and Alia. Really liked his chemistry with Alia.

Regarding JHMS, found it Okayish. I really liked Anushka and her character. Liked bit of SRK but he was not fitting in it completely. As if he is trying too hard to do so. But their chemistry was good and I think movie was watchable just because of that.

People got tired of stupid dialogues by the time Harry reaches India. I think the edit was the problem. As it looked like scenes are disjointed.

The starting song itself felt like forced and didn’t have any context and similarly so many other things.

It could have become a good movie if they put bit of focus on his lostness and homecoming and her issue also.

really liked songs too. There were some nice moments which could have become great moments bur couldn’t be. Srk looks terrible while crying. He is crying and we are seen that its because he misses his home. But its just a label sort of. Its not properly developed and neither his dream part which is crucial to a Imtiyaz movie.

I hope they would have done that part better and may be reduced some song or some other scenes.

It is the weakest movie of Imtiyaz and he was no where in the movie. Its as if somebody just copied the dialogues from his earlier movie and some situations and made a movie around Harry and Sejal.

Srk could have played his age and Anushka could be young. He could have been bit wise and experienced but somewhere tired and she would be like millennial and searching for peace. Basically they could go into the Dear Zindagi or Waiting territory and play with different idea there.

It’s ironic, then, that the frustrating ADHM by Imtiaz Ali wanna-be Karan Johar turned out to get better critical reviews than Imtiaz’s JHMS where he tries to be Karan Johar but miserably fails, primarily because, he’s not a film-maker as vacuous as Karan Johar. And the one good thing I would say about JHMS is that I was NEVER as frustrated with this film as I was with ADHM [except for the heart-churning songs of CHANNA MEREYA and TU SAFAR MERA]; and this is a testimony to the fact that even if Imtiaz decides to betray himself, he’s going to have a hell of a time doing that..

JHMS in my opinion will feature at the top in list of worst mainstream films ever made, only small mercies i could spot was, the picturisation of radha, the manner in which portugal was shot, those are only portions with some feel and it is the only location that lends some support to the story. Overall i thought the second half was marginally better than the first, in the former atleast i could sense a melodramatic push. If you disliked Befikre or ADHM, then i suggest you to watch this trash, you will have a new found respect to them.

Rishikesh: Yes, I too thought the second half was slightly better than the first. But I have to admit that the London/Vienna locales in ADHM were shot with far more texture than the European ones here — the screen looked so bland. And this is KU Mohanan we are talking about, whose cinematography in Miss Lovely is among the most amazing in recent times.

brangan & Honest Raj (formerly ‘V’enkatesh): Yes. I am talking about Adoor’s film. I wanted a star hero to see play the master in Vidheyan kind of film in Bollywood. Now, Amitabh Bachchan is too old to play that. Aamir Khan chooses “responsible” roles. Salman usually plays to the gallery (He has no such acting talent as well). Now lets come to Shah Rukh Khan .

If I were giving importance to physicality, I would have gone with a Sanjay Dutt. My point is, why can’t a star hero play such roles? Leave them rejecting it. Why we reject such ideas outright on paper as the audience? For example, if we talk about Vikram Vedha’s remake in Hindi, names such as Manoj Bajpayee will come for Vikram’s role. Why can’t we dream at least of a star hero playing such roles? We complain that heroes do not experiment. But our minds aren’t ready to dream in the first place. I could. I believed that Shah Rukh has that ability to play roles that can exhibit potential grey shades. That too which exhibit a face before the public and the extreme opposite in private (Darr: harmless friend, stalker; Baazigar: dual roles, cold-blooded killer; Yes Boss: Shameless employee, self-esteem hurt; Fan: star, real self etc.). Moreover, his previous choices show him as a flawed man instead of a picture perfect Sultan or a Mahaveer (no offense to anyone). Any opinions on my thoughts?

Pavan: I agree more or less. I wasn’t sure where you were seeing SRk in a Vidheyan kind of setup, and your clarification helped. Yes, he would have changed the tonality of the film and made it his own — just like how a Paheli, with an SRK in it, becomes very a different film from Mani Kaul’s version of the same story.

In a way, I feel bad for SRK because not all the films he’s made of late are lazy films. Yes, Dilwale was an outright cynical enterprise, but Fan was something different, as was Raees. But the concepts are far more fascinating than the end result.

But with JHMS, I’m not even able to see what drew him to this story (or what Imtiaz Ali was trying to do in the first place).

PS: And you’re right about Vikram Vedha. People usually make the mistake of saying “oh, Vijay Sethupathi is a certain kind of actor, so we must have someone in the same zone.” I’d rather see something like what RS Prasanna seems to have done with his Kalyana Samayal Sadham, which is to take just the essence of something and completely reimagining it (as opposed to just remaking it).

I had really broken down seeing the cruelty meted out to Shah and Imti on social media. Even Befikre- a much worse film wasn’t ripped apart the way JHMS was. And unfortunately I really liked the film. Like really, really. And I haven’t liked anything by Shah for more than a decade.

So thank you for saying that you should never second guess your reaction BR. It probably salvaged me over this weekend.

@Pavan – I don’t know how SRK would work in Vidheyan; like MANK, having watched Mammootty in the film, it is hard to see SRK in that role. But I agree with you – we talk about stars being typecast, but we (the audience) are equally culpable in not accepting them.

@BR, the problem, I think, is that now he is trying to remake the roles to fit his image. When he began his career, he took more risks than any of his peers. With both Raees and JHMS, from what I have read, the final product was not the original script that was given to SRK. He wanted them re-written. It is unfortunate that both filmmakers wanted to work with him so badly that they were willing to subjugate their vision to accommodate the star.

I wonder if “Dear Zindagi” is technically considered as a Shah Rukh Khan film, if so, then it has to be one of the best SRK films ever. Gauri’s ability to capture the nuances is astounding and that coupled by the charm of the actors made the film refreshingly real. Apart form that, the only fine film SRK has done in recent times, will be Fan. Despite its flaws the movie was a well made one that had many things going for it. Frankly, I don’t mind him doing romantic movies, even in JHMS, there are scenes where he shows flashes of his talent, his intention must perhaps have been to explore a romantic film with a different language, but Imtiaz Ali completely failed in his endeavour to bring that successfully to screen. I think, there is a long gap before his next and he is doing a lot of hard work for the same, hope it gets rewarded.

Anu Warrier: I was talking about a film like Vidheyan. Something where a powerful, grey shaded man can be execute undue influence over someone working under him. Say like a filmmaker and his AD. I know that Bhaskar’s role needs menace, but in today’s society, an average looking Joe can be terrible than anyone. And, like Rangan says, Shah Rukh has the ability to own a character and change the film’s tone. If the murders in Baazigar were intriguing despite the cheesy score, it is because of him. It was evident in Fan that the old Shah Rukh is still strong, alive and kicking. And in Raees his voice made me feel that he can play an authoritative chieftain with ease.

Pavan: Sanjay Dutt would be an interesting choice. I wasn’t sure about even the late Amrish Puri.

Why can’t we dream at least of a star hero playing such roles? We complain that heroes do not experiment. But our minds aren’t ready to dream in the first place. I could. I believed that Shah Rukh has that ability to play roles that can exhibit potential grey shades. That too which exhibit a face before the public and the extreme opposite in private (Darr: harmless friend, stalker; Baazigar: dual roles, cold-blooded killer; Yes Boss: Shameless employee, self-esteem hurt; Fan: star, real self etc.).

You got the answer yourself. Additionally, the Remo thread might interest you. I’m not sure if it’s possible to write such characters (Darr, Baazigar) for somebody like him without being “socially irresponsible” today. Somebody even found Dil Se problematic solely because of his character. We’ve progressed to a level where a star cannot play anti-hero roles anymore. It’ll be interesting if Shaad Ali remakes KV in Hindi.

I don’t know why but I keep thinking of Sejal more now. I think its the 2nd best female character IA has written after Geet. I never cared about Tara or Meera or heer or even Veera. But I don’t know why I keep thinking of Sejal.

Similarly I still keep thinking of some scenes. or may be its because of songs. I keep thinking of some scenes in 2nd half specially where some operatic singer is singing. I think thats the scene I could feel magic and connect.

Now after listening to some wonderful lovely songs, i think about movie, I could see what they were trying to make which it couldn’t be. I can sense what they wanted to make from its songs.

The biggest problem is that scenes are disconnected and characters are not fully utilized. That may be because of edit or may be thats the way they did it or my gut feel says its because of edit.

I also think about Harry a bit and I can feel his emotions now. I can feel now what was the intensity of the his demons.

I think I liked the movie more now than just after it was over. May be the ending is so bad that it ruins the whole feel of the movie when you think about after just coming out of theater and you find the movie just ok. But now when I think about it and i think its ok movie which is not bad.

Swimming against the tide, I agree with Vidya (and a few others). Despite it not feeling like an Imtiaz Ali film, I liked it. It’s interesting how Karan Johar has now attempted an Imtiaz Ali style film with Ae Dil Hai Mushkil, and Imtiaz has returned the favour with this film. And I have (to my surprise) liked both despite the obvious flaws and near universal criticism.

As for Shah Rukh Khan, I’m glad that he’s (at least ostensibly) over his Rohit Shetty/Farah Khan phase and is back to being bolder in his choice of roles and films. Fan, Dear Zindagi, Raees, and now this film mean that there’s hope for the future.

Since people are suggesting the kind of movies SRK should be doing in the future, I have a suggestion too. Kaanamarayathu, a movie Mammootty did in the ’80s, directed by I.V.Sasi. SRK could play the rich, older man who sponsors a younger, orphan’s education through her college years. The girl falls in love with him not knowing that he is her sponsor.

I guess it is appropriate for SRK because it is romance, his comfort zone and more importantly he can play his age.

I don’t know if the plot is too dated or slow for the present generation.

If some director can update it for the present gen, without making it jazzy and showy with European locales or 8 item songs and can instead remake it by retaining the original movies’ charm, heart and soul, it would be great.

Also casting a heroine who doesn’t go into full retard mode to be”bubbly” would be nice.

So I’m an SRK fan, but conversely am also his biggest critic when he does trash like Happy New Year. That, for me, is a film that ought never be made, at least not by someone in the space SRK is now.

But I’m perfectly happy with the film’s he’s choosing now. I loved Fan, and even it’s ‘preposterous’ thriller bits worked for me. I appreciated the ambition behind Raees, and the thought and message behind DZ. As long as SRK tries to do something different from here on out, I’d be okay.

Which is why it surprised me that people found JHMS to be a typical/generic SRK movie. I don’t think it was. In the second half, the honesty with which they explore their attraction to one another, how they openly acknowledge it, and how physical they get about it, was refreshing for me. (One could argue it’s a more mature version of such flirtations in DDLJ, and more spiritual than the one in KANK). In the end, that trademark Imtiaz Ali exploration of the gray area between ‘succumbing to impulses and cheating’ like you mentioned, is what made me respect the movie. It harkened back to the Rumi postscript in Rockstar : “beyond right and wrong, there is a field, I will meet you there(sic)”

But the problems with this movie are numerous. It’s overlong, joyless, lacking intensity in bits, and with poorly detailed characters. The last problem, especially, is a deal-breaker for an Imtiaz Ali ‘heart, not head’ movie.

But like I said, I still believe that this film deserves to be made, irrespective of it’s box office performance. SRK should be past all that now. He’s too big to become a character actor, so these kinds of films and characters should become his staple now. What I would change though, is how he markets these films. Barring Raees, none of his past few films have been geared towards a typical B.O. smasher, so why market it like that? Stop appearing on every TV show and asking everyone to watch your films because the films you make aren’t everyone’s anymore. And that is fine!

A day after I watched the film, I’m still bemused, wondering what the point of it was. Why on earth would a thinking director like Imtiaz even begin to feel he had a story to tell, in this vague and rather pointless film?

For all that I did not enjoy Tamasha, there was at least some substance to the story, some heft it had which lost its way somewhat. Here the film itself felt so lost, perhaps Sejal searching for her ring was a metaphor of sorts for the entire film’s lack of substance!

Surely one key ingredient in making this an appealing rom-com/ramedy or whatever this was meant to be, would have been to show why the leads would have wanted to get together. I mean, without showcasing that want from their side, why on earth would the audience care?

I could not for one minute buy into Harry and Sejal’s equation. Why on earth would she want him to tag her as “laayak” within literally 2-and-a-half scenes of their journey to search for the ring? So what if he did not see her as “hote”? Was his certificate of her desirability so important? Granted, she must have had reservations about the authenticity and depth of her fiance’s feelings for her—-but was that reason enough for her to literally latch on to her tour guide’s appreciation/interest?

And why should Harry have fallen for this loosu-ponnu is beyond me. In the end, we have him spouting something about a “kami” within him, which he can offer Sejal, which will ensure she gets his “khayaal” throughout their lives or some such thing. Admittedly, Sejal acted so clueless and borderline idiotic, she perhaps needed someone to ensure she didn’t do herself harm with her inane capers. But the point is, with Harry looking old enough to be Sejal’s father, this “khayaal rakhna” angle seemed almost like a midlife crisis on Harry’s part. Surely not something which Imtiaz had in mind?

And why, oh why, when Harry already had dreams about his home back in Punjab, did he need Sejal to awaken him, about the cause of his feeling of rootlessness? Didn’t he already realize that he felt all lost and lifeless since he yearned for home? And if he didn’t, what was it that Sejal did (amidst all her stupid antics), that made him have that eureka moment?

I somehow can’t help feeling all the more bugged with this movie, since it seems like such a poor choice on SRK’s part to take up this role at this stage. I’d seriously thought that with Fan, Dear Zindagi and to a certain extent, Raees, he’d started doing something different, roles which were more suited to this point in his career. But then bang comes this movie. Sigh……..

And yes, amidst all the pointlessness, I was at least hoping to see more of Budapest, which I have been told is absolutely stunning, richly deserving its tag of “The Paris of the East”. Why bother to set the film in such a lovely city, if practically all you want to show of the architecture is a very generic cafe which could, really, be anywhere else in the world?

I liked SRK in the film. he gave a controlled mature performance without the usual frills or dipping in to his usual bag of tricks. That’s the only good thing i can say about this film and Imtiaz’s contribution to it. a very underwhelming and boring experience. .its really sad that poor shahrukh just cant catch a break , especially when he is making an effort towards doing better films and courting better filmmakers. He still oozes star charisma and holds the screen as nobody else. its only because of him that i found the film tolerable . its impossible to believe that Imtiaz watered down his favorite concept right down to its bare minimum with absolutely no layering or characterisation whatsoever. its just so simplistic and pointless. either he was overwhelmed with SRK’s participation or he has seriously run out of ideas after making a series of films around the same plot. As someone who is an ardent admirer of his work,i hope he bounces back with his next.

Kanamarayathu was remade in Hindi as Anokha Rishta with Rajesh Khanna. and i dont really see SRK in that role . it requires an actor whom we associate a certain age, certain maturity, like Anil kapoor who played a similar character in Lamhe

SRK is really at a crossroads. He is still associated with young romantic image even as he as outgrowned it, but at the same time he has yet to acquire the maturity or gravitas where we would accept him in a Dangal .he is too old now for his strength genre and not old enough to try something keep in with his real age.this explains the confusion in his career with films flopping left right and center. Going by reports, this film has been his worst opener. i dont know whether his next film Dwarf is going to be a solution either. i looks like a very expensive risky gamble. hope he can pull it off

Pratiek Samantara:the films you make aren’t everyone’s anymore. And that is fine!

That’s a great comment, but this won’t be entirely feasible till the costing of these films is proportionate with their not-for-everyone-ness. Because unlike an Aamir, Shah Rukh hasn’t developed that “branding” wherein you get the crazy-high salary you want, you make the movies you want, and the audience loves you through it all.

But as an aside, he does look terrific for his age. He’d started looking a bit tired in films like Happy New Year, but in this film, I didn’t feel that.

I want to ask: Does everyone feel it’s wrong to have an older star romancing a younger heroine? Yes, I agree that it’s unfair that many older heroines don’t get the same luxury — they don’t even get to be “heroines” after they cross an age. And that’s true of Bollywood, Hollywood, Kollywood, wherever.

What I’m asking, however, is whether knowledge of the age difference influences the way you see the couple on screen and respond to them?

Because whether its Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint in North by Northwest (they were some 20 years apart) or SRK and Anushka here, the chemistry is what makes me buy (or reject) the couple. In the sense that even if I know about the age difference, good chemistry can make me ignore it.

No i dont mind if its Cary Grant or Robert Redford 🙂 there was a 26 year old difference between Grant and Hepburn when they worked together in Charade, but i thought it was pure magic. But it is hard to accept a 69 year old Connery romancing a 29 year old Catherine zeta jones in Entrapment even if their chemistry was good.

i didnt mind SRK and Anushka, mainly because Anushka has a history with SRK, she made her debut with him and they dont look that much apart in age. may be if it was someone like Alia or Parineeti, then would have looked odd. you are right about SRK in this film, he does look much better than his last few outings where he looked tired and jaded. the same goes for Aamir too who still looks good and if he was to romance fatima sana sheikh in his next film, then i dont think i would find it creepy

But i find it very hard to accept some of the heroines that are often paired with Mammootty, Mohanlal, chiranjeevi, Rajni balakrishna and so on. some of the pairings really creep me out

@ BR: “Does everyone feel it’s wrong to have an older star romancing a younger heroine?” and “whether knowledge of the age difference influences the way you see the couple on screen and respond to them?”

My answer would be a (qualified) No to the first question and “sometimes” to the second. 🙂 🙂

I wouldn’t say it is “wrong” to have an older star romancing a younger heroine. But at least when the age gap approaches a couple of decades or more (and neither party looks anything other than their real life ages!), wouldn’t it be better for the film to actually have them playing characters approaching their age? And acknowledge/incorporate the evident age gap in some way, in the plot? (Or conversely, choose actors who are appropriate for the age their characters are supposed to be, in the film)?

In JHMS, we’re shown that Harry left home several years ago, hoping to make his life as a singer in Canada. I can’t remember precisely, but was there some indication that this had happened some 15 or 20 years prior to the timeline of the film? But in the flashback, SRK leaving home is shown to be a very young lad, late teens possibly. Which would make him, what, mid to late 30’s for the film timeline? I don’t mean to sound ageist, but SRK, though he’s aged gracefully, looks every bit of his chronological age.

As to whether knowledge of the age difference influences the way I see a couple on screen—it does, to an extent. At least, in movies where the age gap is not part of the plot and addressed as such. For instance, when I see Sivaji romancing Manjula in their films together, it looks (with all due respect) ridiculous. Apart from the 25 year odd (and very evident) age gap, the fact that Sivaji adopted (or was asked to adopt) the mannerisms and airs of a much younger man, is very jarring. More recently, the SRK–Deepika, Salman–Jacqueline and Salman–Sonakshi pairings all looked—well, odd. (At least in Chennai Express, though, Rahul was shown to be much older to Meena) 🙂

I do agree that its the chemistry which is the main factor in buying into or rejecting the on screen pairing. But I didn’t find the SRK–Anushka chemistry to be all that great in JHMS. Perhaps its their evident age gap that made me think that way, I’m not sure. Anushka’s portrayal of Sejal as ditsy and clueless, certainly didn’t help matters any. It may have helped had she brought some more maturity to her role……….

@ JHM: wrt Kanamarayathu, I agree, I would really like to see SRK attempting that role, he certainly is capable of reintepreting it well. Wasn’t a particular fan of Mammootty ever, but this is certainly one of his finer performances.

@MANK: I agree with you on SRK’s career being at a crossroads. But IMO, the reason why he’s still stuck in a plateau between his romantic loverboy image and one with more gravitas befitting his biological age, is that he himself hasn’t really moved conclusively away from those romantic lead kind of roles.

I mean, Mammootty was 33, I guess, when he starred in Kanamarayathu? And Anil Kapoor was 35 when he starred in Lamhe. Both continued to act in “young romantic hero” roles after these movies as well, because they were young enough to carry those off. But their “mature” performances in these respective movies usually find their way into discussions of their finest films.

SRK on the other hand, is already, what, 51? If he doesn’t resolve to consistently do roles with more maturity and gravitas now, then when is he going to do it? How many more years or performances does he have left, to credibly play the “SRK type” charmer/ romantic lead? I don’t know if it was SRK or one of his heroines, who once said that he could effortlessly create chemistry with even a lamp post. IMO, holding on to that tagline now in however few films is still futile, he needs to adapt. And I don’t think audiences are averse to that…..he did have success with Dear Zindagi, Raees (to a certain extent).

Sure, he is going to have a section of his fan base who is going to resist that change, still wanting to see him as the dimpled charmer. But where do the numbers stack up, is the question. How many would find him believable and appropriate for those “SRK type romantic lead” roles as opposed to how many who will only accept him in those roles.

brangan:Does everyone feel it’s wrong to have an older star romancing a younger heroine? Because whether its Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint in North by Northwest (they were some 20 years apart) or SRK and Anushka here, the chemistry is what makes me buy (or reject) the couple.

Not wrong if the subject supports that. Say, a Lolita, Apoorva Raagangal or a Nishabd. Not wrong when the motives are clear too. Say the regular mass films where the romance is just a subplot of the film, like one of the many tissues in an organ which one cannot do away with. It goes terribly wrong if the pairing looks creepy. One good example is Sanjay Dutt and Prachi Desai in Policegiri.

But yes, I would like to add that the pairing should have a purpose if one wants the age difference has to be highlighted. I don’t want to see a 40+ male with no luck in marriage falling in love with a girl whose age is nearly 10-12 years less to him. Why can’t it be like, a relationship that explores a platonic bond slowly heading towards the wrong path? Almost what a Rathinirvedam (old one, didn’t care about its remake at all) minus the sleaze would do, as a pure case of drama more than a teen’s sexual fantasy.

Honest Raj (formerly ‘V’enkatesh): Remo? SK’s role cannot be defined an anti-heroic one though it is a stalker. To give it a frank thought, Remo wasn’t that deep as a case of storytelling or filmmaking. It was just a template film gone wrong. And SK reminds me of the roles written for Rajinikanth. The difference was, it was like watching the villain in Rajinikanth play the lead and win what he couldn’t do with a Kamal or other heroes in his films as an antagonist. The more we rooted for the villain there, the higher was the resonance here. But Remo, um, was watching SK being a living compilation of female bashing memes and TASMAC songs. There was no real charm and motivation in that role.

We’ve progressed to a level where a star cannot play anti-hero roles anymore. Agreed with this point. But sometimes, the motivations of the film can influence this line. Mankatha is one good example in Tamil. Nani (you might know him from Aaha Kalyanam) almost managed it with Gentleman in Telugu, which too was a notable success. In Bollywood, Badlapur was one of the recent ones I can recall. Notably, at some point, these three films are thrillers.

MANK:SRK is really at a crossroads. He is still associated with young romantic image even as he as outgrowned it, but at the same time he has yet to acquire the maturity or gravitas where we would accept him in a Dangal.

Something worth an article in just three lines here. Remember Rangan writing something like this in the past when he was writing for The Hindu. Look wise, I find Dear Zindagi the closest to his real age. It was a very great experience watching him fit himself in a role which a Prakash Raj too can do (watch Telugu films like Seethamma Vakitlo Sirimalle Chettu and you can understand why) and yet be at ease completely, almost elevating the film when it was hitting its all-time low as both a performer and as a character.

PS: Does anyone think of talking like this about script choices and career graphs if it was a Salman Khan’s film. If not, is it because of a superstardom being taken for granted by us?

@ Honest Raj: “Sivaji romancing Manjula is at least ten times better than MGR romancing Latha/Manjula ……….” Oh yes, completely agree, watching MGR paired opposite Latha/Manjula was just bizarre. Happened to have listened to Malare Kurinji Malare just before I typed my previous comment, so Sivaji–Manjula came to mind about age-mismatched pairs. There have been others, equally bad or worse 🙂

Rajini–Ash, Rajini–Anushka Shetty, Rajini–Radhika Apte all looked terribly mismatched. As did Mammootty–Isha Talwar. Balyakalasakhi where they stared opposite each other bombed, so perhaps, fingers crossed, the era of Mammootty and Mohanlal getting away with romancing heroines younger than their daughters, is slowly inching to a close. It’s taking time, though. 🙂

Watching srk films nowadays is like meeting your best friends after a long time. You don’t really enjoy the conversation, there’s nothing to talk about, but you still like them so you keep smiling at the lame jokes.

But to give the devil it’s due, you have to appreciate srk for at least not being lazy just because he is srk. A lot of fascinating arcs are slashed in as subplots. I really found the scene before the radha song interesting, it reminded me of randeep hooda’s lament in highway, but it is immediately followed by a ‘fun’ song. The hawayein sequence is the sole imtiaz ali moment in the film, but the scene itself is silly. Someone held a knife in imtiaz’s neck and threatened him? But for all its dissapointments, the film to its credit never makes you look off screen because srk is only the third most beautiful thing in a scene – after the locations and his tattoo.

I could smell many innovative ideas but they never come alive on screen. They are just ideas on paper. What a great idea to use the safar song as a nod to Harry’s as well as srk’s career. What a great idea to make him break his kissing vow (no, jab tak hai jaan was just a touch on the lips). What a great idea to roll the end credits halfway through the end credit song. And what a great fan moment to see srk for the first time in a turban after all these years.

But these ideas need a tight script. Even if imtiaz wanted to let loose the drama and not hold on to his strengths, he could have made a simple breezy harmless ENTERTAINER. This superstar syndrome happens with rajini films down south. A big reason for why a baahubali succeeds is that it doesn’t have to hold on to the star power. It just needs a face. And why aamir khan films do so well is that we expect him to do something different all the time. Ever since we exited the shahrukh khan era after my name is khan, he just doesn’t want to go for the biggggie. He’s tired.

And if not for anushka I would not have bought even a second of the film. Both of the lead characters are typical imtiaz ali guys. The problem is that they don’t do things an imtiaz ali-er does. They are not crazy. They are only silly. They search for a ring in a mela?

Every auteur experiences one misfire midway. Bombay velvet, mirzya, Rangoon, and now this. May the next film (of imti and srk) be better

To look at it from the business perspective, a film needs a big star to put bums on the seat and to get the project off the ground. I(from here on its my perspective), for one look for familiarity from my heroes on screen. I cling to my childhood heroes for as long as possible, to keep my illusion of youth. As a sporting parallel, I felt old when SRT retired – I wanted him to play forever,even when it was evident that his sporting prowess had declined. I wanted maximum ROI for my emotional investment over the years. Surprisingly for whatever reason, that doesn’t happen with heroines. In fact when I see a old heroine, like Kajol/Ash/Tabu/Vidya its a terrible turn off for me. When a sufficiently critical mass of people have similar feelings, you cannot blame the filmmakers for the malaise.

There is another factor at play here – the movies, at least the ones that I watch on the big screen are a escape from reality for me. I watch movies most of the times with a few of my friends families. This requires meticulous planning and a lot of effort. The film has to cater to a wide variety of tastes. In fact, the adults in the group have come to the conclusion that the lesser the women in a movie, the easier it is, for all of us to enjoy the ride without any emotional baggage. So the big stars’ movies (the south indian ones at least) are a safe bet, because the focus is on the hero all the time. Vijay and Rajini have both perfectly cornered this segment of movie audience, Ajith is almost getting there. When the kids love Vijay anna dancing on the screen and Rajini dealing with the baddies, I am okay with the woman being half his age.

This is not to say that I don’t watch women centric movies or emotional melodramas. I reserve them for the my personal viewing pleasure or when a few hard core movie buff friends, put together a binge-watch-movie-Friday night. I can relate to it more when I watch it that way. I enjoyed GVM’s YA and hated NVP on the big screen. But months later, solo watching NVP on my laptop was a totally different experience. It no longer felt as heavy as it was in the theater – or may be I was going with the flow at that time. To sum up , do I want more films, where the romance is believable and the woman better portrayed – yes absolutely, but don’t expect me to come to the movie hall all the time. Do I enjoy a ‘well made film’ where a middle aged hero romances a girl fresh out of college – yep I enjoy it without an iota of remorse/guilt – you can take away that pleasure from my cold dead hands.

The last comment by Uncouth Village Youth makes me sob and scream alternately at the sexism 😦 I hope he was being sarcastic.

There was the blog discussion earlier about some Anuj or some such person being personally insulting and whether they should be blocked. No lets not block anyone. Let us hear what people truly feel. I for one, get jolted out of my naivete.

Lolita, AR, ADHM, Ki & Ka, Manmathan, et al, had actresses romancing younger men because the characters were written that way. AR also had a young Jayasudha stalking and romancing a much older Major Sundararajan. On the other hand, Kamal romanced Srividya who was just about a year older than he was in RL. Frankly, somebody like Vyjayanthimala or Savithri should’ve played her part. But then, it was a different era. I think BR is talking about something like the AB-Aishwarya relationship in Guru/Raavan. I really liked the Vidya Balan-Parambrata Chatterjee arc in Kahaani. In Tamil, I can think of Kanda Naal Muthal.

In real life there are instances where younger men fall in love and marry women older to them though they may not be as famous as SRT or Sunil dutt. The most cruel thing is when heroines play mothers to their once upon a time heroes.

Without exaggeration, this is the most disappointed in a movie I’ve been since Salaam-E-Ishq in 2007.

Maybe it’s just a function of my expectations. After all, Imtiaz Ali has made some fantastic films — Jab We Met, Love Aaj Kal, Highway, and Tamasha (which I truly believe will become a cult classic over the next several years).

And then there’s the truly fantastic soundtrack. Definitely the best soundtrack of 2017 and one of Pritam’s best in many years (definitely his best since Barfi and I’d debate it’s possibly his best since Life In A Metro).

I even shrugged off the negative reviews… after all, as long as the movie was enjoyable, I’d be happy. But I finally saw the movie yesterday and I left very disappointed.

The most frustrating part is there’s a good movie hidden in here. Perhaps it’s the impact of working with Shahrukh Khan. Or maybe it’s the impact of YRF. And maybe that’s the difference between Love Aaj Kal and Jab Harry Met Sejal.

But as it stands now, there was a lot to dislike about the movie:

The characters, to start out with, were poorly-sketched out. Harry’s background in India could have been an interesting plot, but we learn almost nothing about it. And Harry was such a creepy character that it made it hard to sympathize with him, the way we could with Ved or Jai. Sejal alternated between being a “modern” girl and a “traditional” girl with little consistency. The acting was okay, at best, which didn’t help.

Then there’s the message. Honestly, the premise was pretty silly and I knew that heading into the movie. But that could have been okay if the rest of the movie was good… honestly, if I describe the premise of Tamasha out loud, it sounds silly, but it worked. But the premise of JHMS (Sejal leaves from the airport to find a ring without searching her bags, her family doesn’t even come with her, etc) was just bad and made worse by the fact there wasn’t a message to the movie, like there was to Love Aaj Kal or Tamasha.

I thought the locales would have been a saving grace and to a certain extent, they were… but Imtiaz Ali falls into the age-old trap of making overseas seem seedy and dangerous, which is something I expect out of a lesser director, but this is the guy who spent half of Tamasha as an ode to Corsica. Somehow, though, Prague and Lisbon, both beautiful cities, are made to be dangerous and seedy towns… and I’ve been to Lisbon and it is a safe and wonderful place to visit.

That’s not to say the movie doesn’t have positives. There are moments here and there that remind you what Imtiaz Ali is capable of. The scene with Harry’s friend getting married. The daytime scenes in Lisbon (set to Phurr, featuring Diplo’s beats). Even the opening scene, set to Safar, gives you a sense of the pain underneath Harry’s character, of being a man without a home, even as some of us felt a pang of jealousy for the man traveling Europe as his job.

And then there’s the music. Amazingly, there are eleven unique songs on the soundtrack (that is, ignoring remixes or different versions of the same song). And they’re all great songs that really fit the vision of the movie. I hope the soundtrack doesn’t fade with the failure of the movie. It’s hard to pick my favorite tracks, but Radha, Hawayein, Parinda, Ghar, Raula, and Jee Ve Sohniya are my favorites.

(Mini side rant: it really bothers me that the full soundtrack didn’t come out until the day before the movie released. It’s a disservice to all the talent involved in making this soundtrack. And if the move is doomed, as this one may be, it sinks the non-chartbuster songs. So while Radha and Butterfly may stick around, since they were on the promotional track for weeks, a song like Raula may get lost, which would be a shame).

Overall, a mediocre and disappointing movie that could have been and deserved so much better.

Not a SRK fan, but to be fair, he has been the most experimental of the big stars recently.

Fan, my favorite of his last three films, was one of the most experimental movies I’ve seen a big star do. A film that examines the strained relationship between a fan and star, while simultaneously destroying the halo the star has around him. The film doesn’t have a true hero or villain. The star(played by SRK, modeled after SRK) is portrayed as a aging, egotistical, hack of a superstar. The fan is portrayed as obsessive and self-destructive. The film ends in the streets of Delhi where both came from, each trying to kill the other. Although the film has many faults(unwanted action scenes), it is an incredibly layered script with SRK’s best performance in a decade.

Dear Zindagi is a simplistic look at mental health, but is still well made and anchored by a great central performance by Alia Bhatt and a subdued SRK. The film differs from other Bollywood movies in how relaxed it is. There are no huge events. Just a psychiatrist and his patient.

Raees is the most problematic and inconsistent of the three, but it is also the most rewatchable. When it’s good, it’s incredible. The entire stylized “Laila o Laila” shootout is amazing and recalls the work of John Woo. The strong central conflict between two men who are stuck in a world of crime that is moving past them(Nawazuddin Siddiqui and Shahrukh Khan). The identity politics. The performance by SRK that makes you forget the star. There’s a lot that is good here. Unfortunately, a need to cater to Bollywood tastes weigh it down. Unnecessary songs and a bad romantic track make the movie inconsistent. On the whole, however, Raees is a very interesting, very rewatchable, crime drama.

Interesting, because for me, JHMS was probably one of Pritam’s worst albums in recent times… There was not a single memorable song… In fact, this year alone, I found Jagga Jasoos to be far more superior and novel, whilst ADHM and Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani are my all-time favorite albums… Hand’s down two of Pritam’s best along with Barfi… But to each his/her own… Peace…

The odds are, he wasn’t. LOADS of people think like that. It is just that truth hurts.

From what I learn from BR’s reviews, good talented writers do exist. But the general attitude that uncouth showcases here will ensures that a person like me will have a 99.99% probability of HATING what is on screen. People have to FLY in the name of action, do distorted stuff in the name of dance and misogynistic things in the name of romance. For they need bums on theatre seats. They ask and so it is given.

BR
BTW, regarding the original question regarding older men and younger women romancing and whether it is off-putting. Not until it is particularly so. Not for me. I don’t think of most MGR-JJ songs in that way, nor do I regarding Rajini-Meena. Not at all regarding Vijay and Amala Paul. I would be lying if I told that I believed Rajini would have been better off romancing Srividya in Maapilai than Amala. Or that Vijay should still be acting with Sangavi and Suvalakshmi. And we don’t have to work it into the story either. It is ok to let it be.

That said, I believe that the story that actors in their 50s or 60s pick should suit their age. I remember the delight when I saw Mahanadhi and thought mistakenly that Kamal was planning to act his age and pick terrific movies to show case his talent.

It is basically poverty in imagination that people want to show a underdog man romance the villain’s only daughter. And why should people be romancing all the time?

And most importantly, where are the next Vijay – Ajith? Dhanush is one, but he is in his thirties too. Where are the men in the 20s who are handsome, charismatic and healthy?

The problem with Hindi Industry maybe that they are hiring only the pedigree. Ours is that we pretend that uncharismatic male people are all we want.

We have become so desperate for young hot romance that we have started looking for it inside the Big Boss household.

As regards the portrayal of much-older male leads romancing much-younger female leads, I think part of the “acceptability”–or at least, the fact that it doesn’t raise flags for everyone–is because of the normalization, over years, of such portrayals in cinema.

The genesis of the acceptability of an age gap—though usually less bizarre than the portrayals on screen—is socio-cultural. As in, real life couples in our grandparents’ and great grandparent’s generations probably had upto a decade or so between them (the male being elder). Of course, there were occasional instances then of the wife being elder by a year or so—quite rare.

Over time, the age gap among couples has tended to go down. Thankfully, with the spread of education and legal statutes being passed, marrying off girls at a young age is becoming much less prevalent now. As has been frequently highlighted by various organizations, the fact of infant mortality being curtailed, has also helped increase the age at marriage for women. There is no longer this patriarchal pressure to marry early and bear as many children as possible, expecting that at least some of those kids survive. And from a socio–economic standpoint, as more women make a career for themselves, the emphasis for their parents to look out for a much older/”well settled” man who may be expected to be the “only breadwinner” is also less.

A study in Madhya Pradesh, for instance, shows the average age gap between married couples in the state, across all socio-economic classes, is 4.4 years. The UN data for South Asia shows the Mean Age of Marriage Difference Between Males and Females as 3.7 years. A far cry from the 20 plus years we routinely see on screen!!

So why is cinema not reflecting actual social realities? Possibly a combination of reasons. The film industry being traditionally male dominated, for one. Also, the male-superstar culture, with mega stars being treated as “youth icons” well into their 50s, while their leading ladies “get promoted” to play their on screen mothers! As UVY candidly stated in his rather disturbing comment above, a “critical mass” of people wanting to cling on to their childhood “heroes”—not heroines, mind you, just heroes!—to keep up their own “illusion of youth”. And this whole normalization of an plainly obvious, huge on screen age gap, when we, the audience, literally convince ourselves that the leads still have “chemistry”.

I remember an interview of Ali Abbas Zafar just after Sultan released, when he was asked why he cast Anushka opposite Salman, when the 22 year age gap between them was so glaringly obvious. His answer—-“they look good together”. No, they most definitely did not—but hey, that’s just my opinion. And even worse, he went on to make some foolish remarks about how it was similar to Priyanka being cast opposite Ranveer and Arjun in Gunday— though Priyanka is just about 3 years older to those heroes (1/7th the age gap between Salman–Anushka, or for that matter, SRK–Anushka).

Again, I know its different strokes for different folks, and that no two people ever look at the same thing in precisely the same way. But for me, when I see comments about how SRK–Anushka had “fiery chemistry” in JHMS, and how his “breaking his no kissing rule on screen” made for such a hot scene—I can’t help feeling a bit bemused. Isn’t their age gap painfully obvious? Will we feel the same way if we see a 50 something guy flirting with a 20 something girl in real life—however charismatic and “aged gracefully” the guy might be?

I can’t help feeling, that actors approaching or into their 50’s should really focus on roles more appropriate/ suitable to their age. SRK, IMO, had excellent chemistry with Alia in Dear Zindagi. Why should chemistry always be the “guy gets girl”, sexual tension wala chemistry? Kaira (Alia) feeling some fascination/ infatuation with Jehangir (SRK) as a result of transference during her therapy sessions, and Jehangir feeling some reverse transference but refusing to act on it, was so sensitively and beautifully portrayed. To my mind, that was a far more beautiful emotion than whatever chemistry was there between Harry and Sejal.

While I appreciate UVY for his honesty, there are a few disturbing ideas that I don’t agree with. First and foremost being, I don’t understand how having a strong female lead can be equated to a lot of emotional baggage in the movie. And about watching the movies with friends and their families, what did the women feel about such movies?

To a certain extent I can understand the need to cling on to the childhood heroes. But isn’t it annoying when a 40 something actor plays the role of a teen college kid? I’m referring to Nanban but there are so many more examples. Like a few have commented here, I don’t mind the age gap but at least the heroes should act their ages.

On the whole age gap question, it’s quite curious that a Katrina, for example is asked during the Baar Baar Dekho promos, how she feels acting with a “younger hero”. I don’t think much at all of Katrina’s (non existent) acting talent, but to give her her due, she and Siddharth Malhotra made for a very photogenic on screen couple. He’s only 2 years younger to her, BTW. How come hardly anyone remarked about her pairing opposite the Khans and Akshay Kumar—all of them 15 years or more older to her?

For those thinking that a wide age gap between the male lead and the female lead doesn’t have to be justified/ mentioned/ worked into the plot, that’s fine. But why are innocuous mentions slipped in movies where the female lead happens to be just a few years older? Guru had a small line where the character playing Ash’s brother asks Abhishek, how come he wants to marry his sister when she is older to him. Wake Up Sid explicitly mentioned that Konkona’s character was older to Ranbir’s. I guess there was a similar line in “Ek Main Aur Ek Tu”, for Kareena’s and Imran’s characters. In none of these films was the (slight) age gap so very material to the story—OK, maybe it was tangentially so, in Wake Up Sid. But it’s really worth thinking about, why these explanations are given in such cases where the female lead is slightly older to the male lead (and its hardly even obvious), whereas it’s hardly considered needed when the male lead is old enough to be the female lead’s father. And still gets cast as being in roughly the same age group as the female lead!! At some point, we need to start asking ourselves the question—do we really see the chemistry in such pairings? Or are we conditioned to seeing it, because it’s become just so normalized?

Putting forth a question to all the movie buffs here. I have watched Vaijayanti IPS and Ashwini (about the athlete) when I was a kid and those movies had female leads too, but I can’t remember how much weightage was given to the male character in those movies. Can someone who remembers elaborate on it?

I cling to my childhood heroes for as long as possible, to keep my illusion of youth.

Like a lot of people here, I appreciate UVY for his refreshingly honest views and presented in a non confrontational manner. and some of what he says does makes sense. But i am just curious about this point. i dont mind a lot of my heroes being paired with much younger heroines, atleast the ones who look physically fit enough for that.

But How about clinging to your childhood heroines too. or is it that you never idolised or obsessed over any of the heroines. or is it the fact that age catches up with women much faster than men. Because i am still as much obsessed with Sridevi and Madhuri as i was young. so too with Meryl Streep or Michelle pfeiffer. they were a unique combination of beauty and talent which i dont think has faded with age. they still look good and still are the great performers they were in their youth. At least Meryl still gets to do lead roles and to an extent Michelle too. i so wish we get to see more of Sridevi and Madhuri. not in the kind of roles that younger heroines are doing, but something befitting their age and stature. i wish someone like Mani Ratnam makes a Bridges of Madison county like romance with Mammootty and Sridevi or Madhuri doing a devil wears Prada kind of character, a dance diva instead of a fashion diva.

Jai: Let’s be honest here. The age factor (that husband has to be older than his wife) is a (widely-followed) societal norm, and to a large extent it applies to cinema as well. To cite another example, Kannada actors Rajkumar and Bharathi Vishnuvardhan, who were twenty years apart, made an “evergreen” pair onscreen. Interestingly, Bharathi would go on to marry a younger Vishnuvardhan in RL. The main reason, as you say, could be the fact that the industry is largely dominated by men. But change, in some form, is definitely happening.

Coming back to reality, how many of our families would be okay with prospective brides being older than their sons? I doubt even the most progressive of families would defy this “norm”. Sure cinema is a reflection of the society, but equally undeniable is that it’s a “larger-than-life” representation of real-life experience.

On a related note, does anybody find AB and Rekha (or Dharam and Hema Malini) an odd-pair onscreen?

As an aside, I don’t think Madhya Pradesh should be considered an ideal example to represent the whole of India. Maybe, the gap is lesser because it’s among the top states when it comes to child marriages.

@ Honest Raj: Amitabh and Rekha are 12 years apart dude….not 22 like SRK—Anushka or Salman—Anushka . 🙂 Dharmendra and Hema Malini are 13 years apart…..

I am not disputing that the widely prevalent social norm (male partner being older to the female partner) does find its way to movies and therefore is widely accepted. That was one of the key points in my comment. But when the age gap on screen goes to a couple of decades or more…..does it really reflect social norm/ reality?? In real life do the majority of people find such a wide age gap appealing/ desirable/ acceptable ? Change has happened in real life, but movies are not catching up fast enough, is my point.

Families in real life not being too open to prospective brides older than prospective bridegrooms…again, true. I have mentioned this as well, that while I personally know of a few couples where the wife is a few months to a little over a year older than her husband, such instances are quite uncommon. The point I am trying to make is, movies very clearly follow this reality— shying away from showing female leads older than male leads….or else putting in seemingly innocuous explanations that they are older (even if the age gap is not that obvious and is not particularly germane to the story). But in which reality is it common/desirable for the male partner to be 20 to 30 years older? And hilariously, no plot angle or explanation provided, in most cases the male leads are cast as characters 20 years younger than their actual age, around the same age group as the female lead, who’s actually young enough to be their daughter.

Your point on statistics from MP is well taken; however I have a feeling that states higher in gender equality indices and HDI like Kerala (where I live), might actually have a broadly similar age gap between married couples. It certainly isn’t going to even remotely approach 20 years!!!

Yes, change is happening, I do agree. But still, there are male superstars across Bolly—Kolly—Molly (I don’t know much about Tolly and Sandalwood but they may be similar i guess), who are romantically paired with heroines half their ages or less……And IMHO, a lot of the chemistry which gets talked about in such cases, is because we have become conditioned to think of it so. Let’s be frank. When we see a 50 something man in real life flirting with a late 20s something girl, what do we instinctively feel? “Gosh, they have wonderful chemistry”?

There are customs and traditions which are becoming redundant due to modern views. Marriage itself is not the first option for many. Marrying maternal and paternal relatives used to be the norm. But now it is looked with contempt. Its not a big deal who is elder, the girl or boy. We discuss age gaps. But things will not change as long as it is convenient and accepted by people. The girl is supposed to produce kids endlessly and so she is supposed to be younger and productive. She should look appealingly younger. Her grey hair should appear after many years. All the rules apply to girls and women only. This sexism is encouraged by honest people. Man can marry again if he fancies a younger girl. Man is eternally desirable just because he is male. Man cant tolerate even films with heroines who can look as old as the hero. Concession is given only if that lady is extremely beautiful. Yes, its a man’s world.

Jai: Change has happened in real life, but movies are not catching up fast enough, is my point.

Because they probably don’t have a choice. Take a film like Kabali. Sure even as a Rajini fan, the Rajini-Radhika Apte portions in the flashback felt odd to me. To play Apte’s role you need to be a performer. Again going back to BR’s original question: Ours is an industry (equally true for Hollywood as well) that routinely shuns heroines (talented or not) as soon as they reach a certain age or once they get married. Sometimes the actresses themselves give up their careers, either voluntarily or to make choices for their families.

Second, even if we consider somebody like Sridevi or Madhuri, there’s very little chance that they’re going to accept a Rajini/Kamal/SRK/Chiranjeevi film (Madhuri had apparently declined an offer from Soundarya for Kochadaiyaan). You can have some faces like Tanvi Azmi/Mita Vasisht (just saying), but the odds of such faces becoming “unrecognisable” when you’re casting them in a mainstream (read popular) film are very high. Why would a producer/director who works in the commercial space willingly take such a risk?

Amitabh and Rekha are 12 years apart dude….not 22 like SRK—Anushka or Salman—Anushka . 🙂 Dharmendra and Hema Malini are 13 years apart…..

It wasn’t aimed at you. 🙂 Anyways, don’t you think a gap of 12-13 years is too high (on screen or otherwise)? Maybe, in a decade’s time people might think so.

Let’s be frank. When we see a 50 something man in real life flirting with a late 20s something girl, what do we instinctively feel? “Gosh, they have wonderful chemistry”?

@ Honest Raj: ” Anyways, don’t you think a gap of 12-13 years is too high (on screen or otherwise)?Maybe, in a decade’s time people might think so. ”

Possibly, let’s see how things go a decade hence. 🙂 Like we agree, some degree of age gap on screen (and in real life) is always going to be there—socio cultural norms will probably continue to engender preference for the male partner being a little older. But definitely (I hope!) not to the bizarre extreme still being seen on screen.

Having finally caught the film (yes, so late 🙂 ) I must say I’m firmly on Vidya’s side – I actually liked it (and I’d gone in prepared to be underwhelmed). It was entertaining enough; SRK actually emoted a little bit more in the second half (the first half was an older, slightly-edgier, “Rahul’), and I was invested in Anushka’s graph – having known young women like her, I found even her irritating behaviour real enough. Had an entertaining 2.5 hours and since I didn’t, at any point, feel like FF-ing the songs or shutting down the laptop, I consider it a success. 🙂

The competition was missing in the movie. Competition within yourself or to another in which a suicidal person will do anything to die for. The reason to live is totally been served when such a point is covered. This connection of competition and the story shown on screen could make this as a flamboyant movie as all the big stars do have in Bollywood. Just my thoughts look for review on this aspect

Have been waiting to see this movie and finally saw it now that its out on Netflix 🙂
I must say I was rather underwhelmed. The whole movie felt rather flaky. Imtiaz Ali’s movies are never strong on plot, but what draws me to them are the characters and the writing. JHMS seemed lacking (but not empty) on both fronts. I actually liked SRK’s performance, who, for long stretches was portraying ‘Harry’ rather than channeling his innate SRK-ness. Anushka, on the other hand, seems to be getting pigeon-holed into a certain type of role and character – a type she is very good at portraying. However, for someone with her talent, I would hope to see more diversity in her future roles.

Just caught this on Netflix and I wanted to record how annoyed I was by Anushka. She was terrible. If the movie had tipped a little more to SRK being a bearable (if not charming) character and smouldering a little more, movie might have been watchable. I’m going to have to swear off Anushka from now post zero and this. Her face post whatever she has done and her general one note characters – I find v off putting.

Just finished watching the film. I actually liked it. The last 30 mins sort of saved it for me. There’s some genuine emotion Ali manages to infuse towards the end that the rest of the film so badly needed. I feel this is very much an Imtiaz Ali film but the desperate attempt to keep it “light” is the film’s biggest problem. Large part of the film is filled with frivolous scenes. The film temporarily comes alive with an occasional good scene and goes back to frivolousness again. I think Ali found his footing only towards the end but it’s obviously too late by then.

The scene when Harry wakes up to find Sejal sleeping next to him and soon starts sobbing helplessly reminded me of the scene in Highway when Mahabir breaks down watching Veera cook. Breakdowns caused by overwhelming memories of the mother in Highway and the motherland in JHMS. Only if the latter had had the dramatic heft of the former.

Made me think whether JHMS was meant to be a birthchild of Swades, Highway and one of those cheesy rom-coms we used to get in the 2000s. It sort of fell in no man’s land eventually. There was still enough to like though. Having seen almost every review bash the film to all corners, i am more than happy to have seen at least 30 mins of good stuff. I am glad that Imtiaz Ali made a better film after this. SRK deserved better though. He’s fantastic at places.

I still feel this film would have worked better if it had Karthik Aaryan as the lead instead of SRK. He’s too big an actor for this role. And the film needed to be at least 30 mins shorter.